Slashdot Mirror

Watch out, Texas is next -- I hope one of the news agencies pick this up, somebody call 60 Minutes (a CBS TV show). http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History. aspx?LegSess=80R&Bill=SB446

If someone's down because you punched them, you're the winner? Not in Texas, where this would give every citizen who had a clear view of events the right to shoot you dead under their new self-defence laws. Being dead makes for a lousy winner. (I don't like those laws, but that's not the point. The point is, one battle does not a war make.)

Wrong.

From the Texas Statutes online, Penal Code, chapter 9:

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON.

(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:

• (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31;
• (2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have retreated; and
• (3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
  • (A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
  • (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

Punching someone -- or even a fullblown fist fight -- does not constitute "unlawful deadly force" unless the assailant is especially skilled in deadly fighting (e.g. a black-belt in martial arts) and is clearly showing intent to beat the other person to death. And in that situation, only a coward would want a passing Good Samaritan to refrain from using deadly force to stop the attack.

P.S. "Aggravated robbery" means robbery using a deadly weapon.

P.P.S. I live in Texas, and to get my handgun license I had to memorize all these relevant laws.

If someone's down because you punched them, you're the winner? Not in Texas, where this would give every citizen who had a clear view of events the right to shoot you dead under their new self-defence laws. Being dead makes for a lousy winner. (I don't like those laws, but that's not the point. The point is, one battle does not a war make.)

Wrong.

From the Texas Statutes online, Penal Code, chapter 9:

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON.

(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:

• (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31;
• (2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have retreated; and
• (3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
  • (A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
  • (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

Punching someone -- or even a fullblown fist fight -- does not constitute "unlawful deadly force" unless the assailant is especially skilled in deadly fighting (e.g. a black-belt in martial arts) and is clearly showing intent to beat the other person to death. And in that situation, only a coward would want a passing Good Samaritan to refrain from using deadly force to stop the attack.

P.S. "Aggravated robbery" means robbery using a deadly weapon.

P.P.S. I live in Texas, and to get my handgun license I had to memorize all these relevant laws.

If someone's down because you punched them, you're the winner? Not in Texas, where this would give every citizen who had a clear view of events the right to shoot you dead under their new self-defence laws. Being dead makes for a lousy winner. (I don't like those laws, but that's not the point. The point is, one battle does not a war make.)

Wrong.

From the Texas Statutes online, Penal Code, chapter 9:

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON.

(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:

• (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31;
• (2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have retreated; and
• (3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
  • (A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
  • (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

Punching someone -- or even a fullblown fist fight -- does not constitute "unlawful deadly force" unless the assailant is especially skilled in deadly fighting (e.g. a black-belt in martial arts) and is clearly showing intent to beat the other person to death. And in that situation, only a coward would want a passing Good Samaritan to refrain from using deadly force to stop the attack.

P.S. "Aggravated robbery" means robbery using a deadly weapon.

P.P.S. I live in Texas, and to get my handgun license I had to memorize all these relevant laws.

Bah! The last part of that got cut off...

"Examples of items subject to use tax include purchases made over the Internet or the telephone from an out-of-state seller who does not collect tax, and items purchased while visiting another state or country."

You can find more information on Texas use tax on this page. You might want to read over the "at a glance" section...

...maybe you live in a state (or outside the states) that has a sales tax for online purchases but, I don't.

Are you sure?!? This form sure does look like they expect you to pay taxes for purchases made online.

From the first few lines of that form:
"Examples of items subject to use tax include purchases made over the Internet or the telephone from an out-of-state seller who does" (emphasis mine)

So in your example, the hardware engineer would be exempt, so long as his wares were not released to the public without the approval of some PE somewhere. Several companies implement this by having a group of chief engineers that handle the big-picture design activity, leaving the tedious details to junior engineers or EITs. The Board can require some goods to actually be designed by a PE as well, but I am not sure if that rule (actually and exception to an exemption) has ever been enforced.

I won't be surprised if 14 is the minimal legal age to be sent to the electric chair.

Actually, so far the youngest person on death row in America was sixteen (Shareef Cousin). Cousin would have been executed by the Great State of Louisiana by now, except for the small problem that he's innocent. After spending four years on death row, the conviction was finally overturned. Yay, justice.

Here's the last words of seventeen year-old Joseph John Cannon (executed by the State of Texas). Another interesting fact: 1 in 9 people on death row were under the age of 19 at the time of arrest (source: Bureau of Justice).

Here's a Time Magazine article on the Kids of Death Row. According to the article, previous Republican Governor of California Pete Wilson suggested that 14-year-olds should be eligible for the death penalty. So your initial statement isn't too far off the charts.

That ended five years ago:

Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty. Atkins v. Virgina,Atkins v. Virginia

Texas, the state that gave us President George W. Bush, is especially fond of executing the young and mentally handicapped.

Of the 44 mentally retarded in the U.S. executed since 1976, nine were in Texas, five in Virgina, only four were executed in states outside the southern Confederacy in the American Civil War.

Defendants with Mental Retardation Executed in the United States

There have been 387 executions in Texas since December 1982. The youngest was 24 in 1985. 17 when he killed a clerk for a six-pack of beer in a convenience-store robbery. There has been almost nothing the like of that since. Executed Offenders

Nope, its not a law in Texas.

http://www.twc.state.tx.us/ui/lablaw/paydaylaw_faq .pdf

Q: After what length of time do I need to provide my employees with a break/lunch period? Do these times need to be paid?
A: The Texas Payday Law does not address the issue of rest breaks or meal breaks. There is no current legislation in the state of Texas requiring an employer to provide breaks - they are optional. Work schedules, including breaks, regular hours and overtime hours, are left to the discretion of the employer and are usually based on the needs of the business.

The reason the news stories don't actually post the teacher salaries is because they are public information that is easily available. It only takes a quick google search.

For my state, North Carolina, that information is here.

For Texas, it is here.

For Louisiana, it is here.

The real problem with teacher shortages is that new teachers do not stick around very long. Usually after a couple of years they realize how low the pay is, how long it will take to get to a reasonable pay level, and how much better they could do in a non-teaching career. I think the pay scale is completely imbalanced. New teachers should ramp up with large raises quickly. After they have been in the system for 10 years, they are less likely to leave and smaller raises can be provided. This could help retain good, young teachers without actually costing the government money.

(A) offer to perform engineering services to the public;

(B) use the designation outside the scope of 1001.057 or 1001.058 to convey the ability or willingness to perform engineering services or make an engineering judgment requiring a licensed professional engineer.

So far, each bill has been filed and referred to the appropriate committee. However, the legislative session just started in January and things don't usually start happening until after the filing deadline on 2007-03-09.

So far, each bill has been filed and referred to the appropriate committee. However, the legislative session just started in January and things don't usually start happening until after the filing deadline on 2007-03-09.

The whole "force" thing is a red herring; the government isn't really forcing anyone to do anything.

The Health and Human Services Executive Commissioner shall adopt rules that mandate the age appropriate vaccination of all female children for HPV prior to admission to the sixth grade.

Then make the complaint to your state legislature.

--- because ordinary crimes of violence are almost never prosecuted under the federal system in the United States.

Quick Facts About the Bureau of Prisons [Last Updated: Saturday, 27 January 2007]

Inmate Population

Total 193,466
Weapons, Explosives, Arson: 25,330 (14.2 %)
Homicide, Aggravated Assault, and Kidnapping Offenses: 5,539 (3.1 %)
Sex Offenses: 4,161 (2.3 %)

There are 42 federal inmates on death row. In the state of Texas alone, 389. Offenders on Death Row

Not that the violent offender in the federal system gets off lightly. To be sentenced in a federal court is pretty much a guarantee that you will be doing hard time:

Sentence Inposed

5--10 years: 52,869 (29.6 %)
10-15 years: 33,871 (19.0 %)
15-20 years: 15,515 (8.7 %)
More than 20 years: 17,020 (9.5 %)
Life: 5,611 (3.1 %)

Race statistics on current Texas death row inmates:

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/racial.htm

Compare that to the race statistics for murders nationwide that *should* be available here:

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/violent_cri me/murder_homicide.html

I say should be because I can't currently view the page...my office's content filter doesn't like it. It should show that roughly half the murders committed in the US were committed by blacks, the other half by whites. Hispanic is not considered a race by the FBI, and are grouped in with whites--you'll need to account for that when viewing the table in the first link.

It would appear that the death row in Texas fairly accurately reflects national murder trends, with blacks grossly overrepresenting themselves by commission of the crime.

Tangent: There are roughly six times as many whites in the US as there are blacks. According to the FBI statistics, they split the murder statistics equally...making a black person six times more likely to commit murder than a white person. Of course, some 85+% of their victims are black; as a white man, I'm six times more likely to be killed by a white person.

Right now some people who know me by a different name from a different web forum just figured out who I am :D

Wha' ??? ..

"That story along with the study is a little misleading. If you look past the sensationalism and to the meat of it, you will quickly find that the intercultural Development Research Association is only concerned with students"

What has a Bill requiring state agencies conduct its work in an open document format got to do with school dropout rates. How would using an ODF format influence drop out rates. Would it go up or down.

'A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT relating to an open document format for electronic state documents. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas:.

'Each electronic document created, exchanged, or maintained by a state agency must be created, exchanged, or maintained in an open, Extensible Markup Language based file format"

Re:Is this that big of a deal? (Score:4, Misdirection)

A couple of years ago, the government (i.e. taxing authority) web sites dropped the pictures and sketches of homes. (I don't think they ever had them for commercial properties.) The web sites now say "Texas law prevents us from displaying residential sketches on our website." Of course, you can still go to the tax office for that info.

Google found this: Title 1, Subtitle D, Chapter 25, Sec. 027:
(a) Information in appraisal records may not be posted on the Internet if the information is a photograph, sketch, or floor plan of an improvement to real property that is designed primarily for use as a human residence.
(b) This section does not apply to an aerial photograph that depicts five or more separately owned buildings.

Indeed Go Texas!

If you live in Texas, WRITE TO YOUR LEGISLATORS ! You can find out who to write to at the Texas Legislature Online's "Who Represents Me?" page. In my case, there were direct links to my Texas State Senator's and Texas State Representative's webpages, and I used the "email me!" type links I found there. If you don't want to take the time to write something yourself, you are welcome to use the same short letter I wrote:

I recently learned that a bill (SB 446) had been introduced to the Texas Legislature which would require all electronic state documents to be stored in a format described by an open standard. I am writing to lend my overwhelming support to this bill, and to express my hope that, if given the opportunity, you will vote in favor of this measure.

Open standards for documents ensure a number of things. First, the records of our great state will be preserved in a form accessible to posterity. You have no doubt heard the aphorism "Those who do not learn their history are doomed to repeat it," and how can our descendants learn our history if it is locked away in a format that can no longer be supported. It would be as if we had recorded all our state documents on 8-track tapes. Second, those who cannot afford the more expensive platforms and applications required for closed format documents would no longer be restricted from participating in the government (of the people, by the people, for the people) of the State of Texas.

Please, ensure that both the present and the future of our state can participate and learn from our government, and support this measure to require open formats for all state documents.

Unfortunately, it's in the form of a recommendation, but it's better than nothing. In a nutshell, it directs Texas state agencies and higher education institutions to consider OSS for all IT procurements. I believe it was originally the brainchild of a Dallas-area senator named John Corona.

I referenced it quite often while pushing for OSS-based IT implementation at the college I was teaching at...most administrators were ignorant that this even existed.

Well, I'm not a Texan, but since it's a bill in the Texas state Senate, I figure you probably ought to contact your state Senator.

Also, since it's going to have to get out of committee before anyone else sees it (unless your state government is unusual), you could contact the other Senators who make up whichever committee it goes into -- which, based on a 10-second scan of the list of committees, I'm guessing is this one. But I could be wrong.

WRONG LINK!

Here's the PDF I quoted from.

I even checked the link this time.

Telecommunications infrastructure maintenance fees (TIMFs) are imposed on persons in the business of transmitting, supplying, or furnishing telecommunications and all associated services in Illinois for compensation (i.e., telecommunications retailers).

And this says that:

The TIF (Texas Infrastructure Fund) is assessed against telecom utilities and wireless providers based on taxable telecommunication receipts.

Which seems to say that these taxes are directed at telecoms, though they are probably passed along to consumers.

Furthermore, http://www.opc.state.tx.us/Phoneb~1.htm says:

The Texas Infrastructure Fund was created by the Texas Legislature to ensure that all Texans have access to advanced telecommunications services. The TIF distributes grants and information to public schools, public hospitals, and public libraries in an effort to improve Texas telecommunications technology across the state.

So the money is given to public schools, public hospitals, and public libraries so they can buy telecommunications access.

So far, there is no information on how much tax money is distributed directly to telecoms to build infrastructure, and what percentage of building expenses that money accounts for.

Telecommunications infrastructure maintenance fees (TIMFs) are imposed on persons in the business of transmitting, supplying, or furnishing telecommunications and all associated services in Illinois for compensation (i.e., telecommunications retailers).

And this says that:

The TIF (Texas Infrastructure Fund) is assessed against telecom utilities and wireless providers based on taxable telecommunication receipts.

Which seems to say that these taxes are directed at telecoms, though they are probably passed along to consumers.

Furthermore, http://www.opc.state.tx.us/Phoneb~1.htm says:

The Texas Infrastructure Fund was created by the Texas Legislature to ensure that all Texans have access to advanced telecommunications services. The TIF distributes grants and information to public schools, public hospitals, and public libraries in an effort to improve Texas telecommunications technology across the state.

So the money is given to public schools, public hospitals, and public libraries so they can buy telecommunications access.

So far, there is no information on how much tax money is distributed directly to telecoms to build infrastructure, and what percentage of building expenses that money accounts for.

Let these guys find out about it & watch the lawsuits fly.

http://www.tbpe.state.tx.us/

The problem is that you don't have any kids. I can't find the original article from 6-9 months ago, so the quickest example I could come up with from google is here. From the article:

Sam and Barbara are married and raising four children under age 17. They earned $25,000 in 2004 and owe no income tax. Their maximum CTC is $4,000 (4 children x $1,000). Fifteen percent (15%) of their earnings over $10,750 is $2,138 ($25,000 - $10,750 = $14,250; 15 percent of $14,250 is $2,138). Since the couple has no income tax liability, none of their CTC is used--the full $4,000 remains. Since this is more than 15 percent of their earnings above $10,750, Sam and Barbara receive a CTC refund of $2,138. They also qualify for an EIC of $2,209, bringing their total refund to $4,347!

You'll notice this is just on their federal taxes and doesn't include Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, SSI, housing allowances, state refunds, etc... That same family above, if they lived in Texas would also receive $8664/year in food stamps. So now we're nearing 40k and we've only done federal tax returns and food stamps.

Now I'm not saying it's going to be easy to raise a family on this amount of money, but by setting things up this way we as a society are giving the wrong message (have more kids, we'll give you more assistance). I also don't want kids starving in the streets, but at some point we are going to have to make people responsible when they bring new lives into this world.

Awards of 100% of real damages plus statutory punitive damages of $100 per victim per incident if negligence is demonstrated would do the trick real quick, I'd imagine.

Unfortunately, your imagination does not conform to reality. Punitive measures rarely have a dramatic effect on human behaviour.

This can easily be seen in actual data. Consider the death penalty.

North Dakota has one of the lowest homocide rates in the U.S. and has not had the death penatly since the 1930's. The homocide rate in Texas is ten times higher, and yet Texas executes people on a regular basis.

The rate of executions in Texas jumped from about 5 per year in the 80's to over 20 per year in the 90's, and this four-fold increase seems correlated with a ~20% drop in the homocide rate over the next decade, but no one who is arguing from the data, rather from their imagination, would suggest that increasing punitive measures is the best way to alter human behaviour. If a five-fold increase in killing convicted murderers brings about only a 20% drop in the murder rate, and yet making Texas more like North Dakota (but warmer!) brings about a ten-fold drop in the murder rate, an objective observer might suggest that we spend our resources figuring out what it is about North Dakota (or other north-central states, or Japan, or Canada, or Switzerland) that results in fewer people killing each other.

The data suggest that neither firearms ownership nor cultural diversity (Canada is one of the most culturally diverse nations on Earth, with criminal gangs drawn from the four corners of the globe all trying to set up shop here) nor punitive penalties are the most important differentiating factor.

And when one moves from the realm of individual to corporate malfeasence and negligence, it is more than clear that companies are willing to take enormous risks in the name of short-term profits as Merck did with Vioxx.

Ergo, whatever you might want to believe, the facts are pretty clearly in favour of punitive measures being a very poor way to influence human behaviour. They are sometimes necessary, but should be the last tool of social control that we reach for, not the first.

every season there's some news report about a hunter shooting another hunter.

And those are people with sight. What was your point again?

currently blind people are not legally allowed to hunt

Uhm, maybe you didn't read the bill but this is only making it legal for them to hunt with lasers, as well as requiring them to hunt with a sighted companion. So it was already legal, just like in Wisconsin (PDF WARNING) and many other places.

every season there's some news report about a hunter shooting another hunter.

And those are people with sight. What was your point again?

currently blind people are not legally allowed to hunt

Uhm, maybe you didn't read the bill but this is only making it legal for them to hunt with lasers, as well as requiring them to hunt with a sighted companion. So it was already legal, just like in Wisconsin (PDF WARNING) and many other places.

Not to be an ass, but what proof do you have that driving above the speed limit, to match the flow of traffic, is legal?

I've been reviewing the Texas code, and the closest I came is this:

545.363. MINIMUM SPEED REGULATIONS. (a) An operator may not drive so slowly as to impede the normal and reasonable
movement of traffic, except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law. (emphasis added)

And the code has this to say about maximum speeds:
545.351. MAXIMUM SPEED REQUIREMENT.
        (a) An operator may not drive at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent
under the circumstances then existing.
        (b) An operator:
        (1) may not drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard for actual and potential hazards then existing; and
        (2) shall control the speed of the vehicle as necessary to avoid colliding with another person or vehicle that is
on or entering the highway in compliance with law and the duty of each person to use due care.

545.352. PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS.
        (a) A speed in excess of the limits established by Subsection (b) or under another
provision of this subchapter is prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable and prudent and that the speed is unlawful.
        (b) [lists speed limits of various types of roadways]


Now IANAL, but I would find it hard to make a case that someone driving 65 in an 80+ traffic flow is breaking the law. Creating a dangerous situation? Yes, given the circumstances - but its dangerous because everyone else is driving at an unlawful excess speed.

(My argument is largely academic, because I drive with the flow of traffic or sometimes faster, as the situation & my mood suits; but I've yet to see a statute anywhere that clearly spells out driving above the speed limit to keep up with the flow of traffic is legal, despite many people claiming this is so).

WOW! Just recently I was talking with someone about how the US is so advance in so many ways yet the BLIND have no easy way to manage paper money. I even asserted that the Blind should have an organization to outright SUE the US government into action. IIRC, the person I spoke with is of Asian heritage, and I was told that in Japan (or maybe it was Korea) the paper currency has a texture or risen symbols to assist the blind know what they are handing to clerks or to others. Now, weeks later, this particular article is on Slash. So much for advancement in the US. Paper money IS costly to make, and the number of blind is vastly small, but that is no excuse to leave them at the mercy of any mischievous or mean clerks.

A quick search of some possibly interesting URLs:

How Does a Blind Person... ?
http://www.blind.state.ia.us/curious/howdoes.htm

"How does a blind person identify money?
Coins can be distinguished by their size and the texture of their edges. Paper money is identified by folding the denominations differently."

---------

Human Resources Code, State of Texas:

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/HR/conte nt/htm/hr.005.00.000094.00.htm

---------

Does the US suck at design?
The Difference Between the US and Switzerland
http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_us ers/2006/07/does_the_us_suc.html

---------

Blind Citizens News, January 1998
http://www.bca.org.au/news9801.htm

"There are so many wonderful things happening in Australia which NFBCA is taking the lead in promoting. We do not have a simple means of identifying paper money here."
That was 1998; I don't know about now...
-----------

Bon...

Stonn she is yours. After a time you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting.
It is not logical--but it is often true.--Spock, Amok Time

I think several of the things I mentioned would also work in Texas, but it's true that different places do have different problems. I use a lot of energy to heat my house, whereas I suppose you use a lot of energy to cool yours. So some of the solutions may be different, but they do exist. For example, I suspect that solar power has a lot more potential for you than it does for me. And with three times the land area you have plenty of space for wind farms, in fact the BBC reported that "According to a US Department of Energy study, most of the electricity needs of the whole country could be provided by the wind power potential of three states: Kansas, North Dakota and Texas". Anyway, although I can't speak from personal experience of living in Texas, here are some made-in-Texas ideas.

Having everybody and their brothers call themselves "engineer" is... annoying.

Doesn't happen here in Texas. There are some draconian laws dealing with using the title "engineer", tracing back to (IIRC) a school explosion in the 30's caused by work done by someone who wasn't a real engineer.

You can't call yourself an engineer unless you are a licensed professional engineer. There are a few very specific exceptions, such as being an engineer employed by the US government.

More below:
http://www.tbpe.state.tx.us/eng_req.htm

Candidates in 5 races? Pah! Try candidates in 300+ races: http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/2006gen sby.htm

What if it is illegal to vote absentee?

In Texas your are only allowed to vote absentee if:
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/pamphlets/ear lyvote.shtml
* going to be away from your county on Election Day and during early voting;
* sick or disabled;
* 65 years of age or older on Election Day; or
* confined in jail, but eligible to vote.

They don't have anything about not trusting the vote. These are the only elligible reasons to vote absentee and not following the correct procedures for voting absentee is considered voting fraud. You are even required to take your own ballot to the postoffice. It is a crime to have someone else deliver it for you. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/23/us/politics/23su ppress.html?ex=1316664000&en=862d1e52931e06ca&ei=5 088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss Kind of defeats the purpose of letting people that are too sick or old to drive to the polling station vote absentee when you force them to drive to the post office, but that is how screwed up the system is. Not sure how the people in jail are suppose to vote?

Big changes always happen after a big storm. The FEMA and insurance groups study the wreckage and come up with new recommendations, which the various governments (fed, state, local) may enact through building codes. The FEMA keeps case studies, for other people to copy and learn. Hurricane-prone states have programs specifically to address construction in the hurricane zones.

Living in a "Windstorm II" area, our bigggest concern is wind-blown debris smashing a window, which lets the wind blow inside, which can then rip the roof off from the inside. That's why hurricane shutters are a big deal. (We're still saving up to buy nice shutters for our house.) Our stick-built house, with brick "veneer", is built to withstand winds gusting to 110 MPH. Note that the above Louisiana success story added $12K to the cost of the house, and would probably violate most planned-subdivision regulations.

That said, a friend from Puerto Rico was shocked when she first moved up here. She nearly put her hammer through the wall trying to hang a picture. "What! The walls aren't made of cement blocks?!"

Big changes always happen after a big storm. The FEMA and insurance groups study the wreckage and come up with new recommendations, which the various governments (fed, state, local) may enact through building codes. The FEMA keeps case studies, for other people to copy and learn. Hurricane-prone states have programs specifically to address construction in the hurricane zones.

Living in a "Windstorm II" area, our bigggest concern is wind-blown debris smashing a window, which lets the wind blow inside, which can then rip the roof off from the inside. That's why hurricane shutters are a big deal. (We're still saving up to buy nice shutters for our house.) Our stick-built house, with brick "veneer", is built to withstand winds gusting to 110 MPH. Note that the above Louisiana success story added $12K to the cost of the house, and would probably violate most planned-subdivision regulations.

That said, a friend from Puerto Rico was shocked when she first moved up here. She nearly put her hammer through the wall trying to hang a picture. "What! The walls aren't made of cement blocks?!"

The RIAA needs to lay off of the dead guy's kids. Seriously. He's DEAD, RIAA. What else could you want? A cookie?

No, it's not a cookie. The RIAA wanted to hold his beating heart in their hands after taking it out of his chest, which sadly, they can not do now.

So they will send the kids to a nice old lady attorney's house made out of gingerbread and candy and to be disposed^H^H^H deposed there.

I tend to take the opposite view to life on Mars (and other planets/moons).
I assume there will be "life" in most places.
Just look around this great varied Earth of ours. In the furthest reaches, in the darkest depths and the most impossible places we find that it flourishes.

We have barely begun to look around on Mars and we certainly haven't dug far below the surface, give it time and I think we will find it.

Why is it so difficult to believe we are alone?

521.126. ELECTRONICALLY READABLE INFORMATION. (a) The
department may not include any information on a driver's license,
commercial driver's license, or personal identification
certificate in an electronically readable form other than the
information printed on the license and a physical description of
the licensee.
        (b) Except as provided by Subsections (d), (e), and (g), a
person commits an offense if the person:
                (1) accesses or uses electronically readable
information derived from a driver's license, commercial driver's
license, or personal identification certificate; or
                (2) compiles or maintains a database of electronically
readable information derived from driver's licenses, commercial
driver's licenses, or personal identification certificates.
        (c) An offense under Subsection (b) is a Class A
misdemeanor.

The exemption (d) is for databases used for government purposes, exemption (e) is for financial instituions for identification and can't be stored without written permission, and exemption (g) is for people in charge of maritime ports.

Don't know what state you live in, but you may want to check for a similar laws.

For all this discussion has focused on the "debate" about global warming, if you think that political interference is limited to environmental science, you're missing a very, very big picture.

Let me start off by saying that scientific advancement is not a left-right issue, and should never be viewed through the narrow prism of party politics. However, the United States has fallen into a (man-made) rut of EVERYTHING being split down partisan lines (even national security, even voting integrity, even scientific research) so that is the playing field we are on, whether we like it or not. Wedge politics infect every issue now.

Under this administration, the religious right has exerted undue influence over decisions ranging from:

• blocking OTC access to emergency contraceptives
• stalling approval of a vaccine for HPV which would prevent cervical cancer
• censoring vital information about sex by imposing abstinence-only education on teens
• forcing doctors by law to peddle phony information about a phony link between abortion and breast cancer

(source article for that list, a must-read)

And without going on a daylong linkhunt, they are passing bad information about condom effectiveness, intimidating non-profit organizations which do not toe the party line on reproductive issues, and denying USAID funds to overseas orgs which even mention abortion, or distribute condoms as part of family planning efforts. (Imagine sending $15B to Africa to fight AIDS without distributing or even even mentioning condoms! Talk about throwing good money away...It's like fighting fires without water, it's that foolish.)

And don't even let's discuss the bi-partisan support for embryonic stem cell research which has been effectively neutered under this administration. Or the medical expertise of Dr. Bill Frist in the case of a braindead woman he never examined, or his patently absurd claim that AIDS may be transmitted via tears and sweat.

Sadly, I could document this sort of war on objective science all day, but I think I've made my point. It infests the policy debate over far more than global warming, and if you think there's no difference between the parties on this, you're sadly, tragically mistaken.

I should also note one thing, my "shoot in the back" examples ONLY apply during the daytime. Home burglaries at night seem to be per-se assumed violent. See e.g. Texas Penal Code, http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/co ntent/htm/pe.002.00.000009.00.htm#9.41.00 and 9.42

See Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code, particularly Sec. 9.42, "Deadly Force to Protect Property" pdf

Trespassing isn't enough to justify deadly force, but it's easy to see how those stories get started.

Here's from my last response to an atheist thinking Religion was the solution for mores:

I'm sure the last thing you want to do is sit in a cafe and read, but here's a couple more links: http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders .htm
(got remorse? nope. one of the final statements is from somebody who can't wait to meet his victims in heaven. word. I can actually admire that level of forgiveness but what does it do for bad people?)
W's gov't funded intensive Christianity prison program increased recidivism. ("Faith-Based Fudging" via http://www.annotatedrant.com/)

And more if you're into this whole partisan thing. . .
Not sure what Christianity is supposed to do. It's not exactly rational. In the Congo: A journey into the most savage war in the world (child witches! bulletproof soldiers! religion gone wild)

Seriously, check out the forum comments.

Let me preface my comments by saying that I live in the Valley (near McAllen and Brownsville). I play video games. I also teach in the poorest school district in the state. So, theoretically the money they raise would come here. But should we be pouring resources into a system this defective?

You have to go deeper into it.

The Lieutenant Governor is the President of the Senate which is enormously powerful.

While the Texas Lieutenant Governor is powerful, the Governor has had many of the traditional roles sent to other executive offices.

It's like the Governor is the chairman of the board, but the Lt. Gov is actually the top shareholder.